Salvation and Belief

I might just move across to the Eastern Religions section for an extended period. Home ground so to speak. This inter-faith dialogue lark is a bit beyond me.

:confused::)o_O
 
muhammad_isa said:
Yes, them .. those who wish evil upon the righteous.
These people could be of any religion .. mankind is capable of evil .. full-stop.
Click to expand...

Well, I find sorting the sheep from the goats rather difficult myself, something best left to others.

Not "capable" of evil. Just "evil" - although as a Buddhist I would tend to use other terms.

In a previous post you quoted:-

"For the rich man to get to heaven is like the camel going through the eye of the needle"

At this, the disciples cried out. "Who then can be saved?" ( i.e. as I would see it, "we are ALL "rich" in certain ways")

and Jesus/Christ answered, "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible"

:)


EDIT:- just popped into my head, that it has been said that at the time of Jesus it was thought by many that wealth was a sign of God's favour. Which puts another spin on it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
muhammad_isa said:
Personally... Not wishing to offend, but that is just illogical dogma.
Click to expand...
No offence taken. :D It's your opinion, OK. I happen to think otherwise, and frankly, I think the evidence is on my side. To quote Aquinas:

"... whereas the highest (science) of them, viz. metaphysics (or theology), can dispute with one who denies its principles, if only the opponent will make some concession; but if he concede nothing, it can have no dispute with him, though it can answer his objections... Since faith rests upon infallible truth, and since the contrary of a truth can never be demonstrated, it is clear that the arguments brought against faith cannot be demonstrations, but are difficulties that can be answered." (Summa Theologiae, FP Q1 a8

We've have the New Atheists trying their hardest to rubbish both our traditions, we have a world sliding into secular extremism ... personally I think it better that people of faith seek their common ground, rather than rehearse that which divides them.
 
Thomas said:
... personally I think it better that people of faith seek their common ground, rather than rehearse that which divides them.
Click to expand...

Absolutely :)
I think our latest exchange started with:-
I said:
The problem, as I see it, is that anybody can claim that a particular human who has lived, is G-d.
..and there's me thinking that G-d created everybody
Click to expand...

You do agree that G-d created the universe and all it contains, don't you?
I would say that "we are in G-d's hands"

@CobblersApprentice said that he is in Amida's hands..
Didi he mean that due to divine powers, or just because he follows him philosophically, I wonder?
 
muhammad_isa said:
Absolutely :)
I think our latest exchange started with:-


You do agree that G-d created the universe and all it contains, don't you?
I would say that "we are in G-d's hands"

@CobblersApprentice said that he is in Amida's hands..
Didi he mean that due to divine powers, or just because he follows him philosophically, I wonder?
Click to expand...

Well, no real need to "wonder" if you had paid attention to my posts.

Sorry. But I just have to wonder if you are here purely to defend your own view/position, or to actually participate in some sort of dialogue.

:(
 
To repeat:-

I rest in Faith/Grace. God being ultimately incomprehensible (or as some insist, "wholly other") I personally see no difference between the words God/Amida/Reality-as-is.

For me "revelation" is our entire Cosmos (not Chaos), and therefore infinite guides can be found within it. This is not a "philosophical" pursuit, or trust, or Faith. As I have said, I work out my salvation "in fear and trembling" and always have.

I recognise no book or prophet as being "above" another.

I may not have used these exact words before, but I have sought (obviously I have failed) to be as clear as possible.
 
CobblersApprentice said:
..I rest in Faith/Grace. God being ultimately incomprehensible (or as some insist, "wholly other") I personally see no difference between the words God/Amida/Reality-as-is.
Click to expand...

I understand that as your position..
..but what is to stop another person saying there is no difference between G-d / insert your human being here / Reality-as-is?
Nothing, obviously. As these human beings will all have different "realities", we have to sort out which reality is real :)

We then get back to the subject of authority. eg. what does that human being claim, and does it fit in with the historical jig-saw of the divine

CobblersApprentice said:
For me "revelation" is our entire Cosmos (not Chaos), and therefore infinite guides can be found within it. This is not a "philosophical" pursuit, or trust, or Faith. As I have said, I work out my salvation "in fear and trembling" and always have.

I recognise no book or prophet as being "above" another.

I may not have used these exact words before, but I have sought (obviously I have failed) to be as clear as possible.
Click to expand...

I have already pointed out that it is your choice to follow whatever you like.
eg. I might choose to be a vegan, or maybe a pacifist etc.

It is the word "faith" that I question .. what does it have to do with faith if somebody chooses to follow another human being, admitting they have no divine authority?

CobblersApprentice said:
Sorry. But I just have to wonder if you are here purely to defend your own view/position, or to actually participate in some sort of dialogue.
Click to expand...

We are having a dialogue .. I try to convey my understanding of reality, and you yours :)
 
Last edited:
muhammad_isa said:
I understand that as your position..
..but what is to stop another person saying there is no difference between G-d / insert your human being here / Reality-as-is?
Nothing, obviously. As these human beings will all have different "realities", we have to sort out which reality is real :)

We then get back to the subject of authority. eg. what does that human being claim, and does it fit in with the historical jig-saw of the divine



I have already pointed out that it is your choice to follow whatever you like.
eg. I might choose to be a vegan, or maybe a pacifist etc.

It is the word "faith" that I question .. what does it have to do with faith if somebody chooses to follow another human being, admitting they have no divine authority?



We are having a dialogue .. I try to convey my understanding of reality, and you yours :)
Click to expand...

I assume you ultimately see the Divine as incomprehensible. I seem to remember in the past that you used a phrase such as "wholly other"?

I agree, there is absolutely nothing to stop anyone claiming to speak in God's name. Yes, we do have to try to sort out what is real.

The subject of "authority" is obviously a thorny one, a difficult one. Apparently you have found it* via an Arabian person who was the mouthpiece, via a angel, of God. Personally, having read much of history around that time and large portions of the Koran, I am not convinced. You are. For you the ultimately "incomprehensible", the "wholly other", has made Himself (and His will) known.

Jig-saw? The best "jig-saw" for me is "this fathom long carcase". A Person. However distorted by "falls", "sins" or disobediences. "Know thyself" or as Dogen would have it, the study of the "self".

No, I must state again, there seems no real dialogue here. Not as I have experienced it before, on other forums or with other posters. Sorry.

EDIT:- * I would insert the word "pre-eminently"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
CobblersApprentice said:
I assume you ultimately see the Divine as incomprehensible..
Click to expand...

Naturally, we are not infinite. We can only understand within human perspectives.
However, this does not give us a license to associate G-d with having an illogical nature.
If religious knowledge did not depend on logic, theological conclusions would be worthless :)

CobblersApprentice said:
The subject of "authority" is obviously a thorny one, a difficult one. Apparently you have found it* via an Arabian person who was the mouthpiece, via a angel, of God. Personally, having read much of history around that time and large portions of the Koran, I am not convinced..
Click to expand...

No .. why should you be?
When I first read the Qur'an as an Anglican Christian, nor was I :)

CobblersApprentice said:
Jig-saw? The best "jig-saw" for me is "this fathom long carcase". A Person. However distorted by "falls", "sins" or disobediences. "Know thyself" or as Dogen would have it, the study of the "self".

No, I must state again, there seems no real dialogue here. Not as I have experienced it before, on other forums or with other posters. Sorry.
Click to expand...

No need to be sorry :)
Dialogue between a Muslim and a Buddhist may not be what you are looking for.
I'm not looking for any particular type of poster, but note this thread is in the Abrahamic section.
 
muhammad_isa said:
Naturally, we are not infinite. We can only understand within human perspectives.
However, this does not give us a license to associate G-d with having an illogical nature.
If religious knowledge did not depend on logic, theological conclusions would be worthless :)



No .. why should you be?
When I first read the Qur'an as an Anglican Christian, nor was I :)



No need to be sorry :)
Dialogue between a Muslim and a Buddhist may not be what you are looking for.
I'm not looking for any particular type of poster, but note this thread is in the Abrahamic section.
Click to expand...

Do you see anything "illogical" about trust/grace?

Maybe after further readings of Sutta 63, and of the historical genesis of the text, you may yet have a eureka moment!

Yes, I am very aware of what section we are on.....:).......but thanks for reminding me.
 
muhammad_isa said:
If religious knowledge did not depend on logic, theological conclusions would be worthless :)
Click to expand...

A slow burner!

Recognising that "Western" and "Eastern" logic are at loggerheads, and the possibility that "theological conclusions" are worthless!

:)

Now that would need to be on another section of the forum!
 
CobblersApprentice said:
Do you see anything "illogical" about trust/grace?
Click to expand...

I would say that that was a meaningless question..
Trust in what? Trust in your own mind? Trust in somebody else's mind? Trust in "reality-as-is"? What exactly?
I assume you refer to grace, as in good manners, decency and respect. That is neither logical or illogical, is it?


I quote from another of your threads:-
CobblersApprentice said:
As a non-theist, I trust Reality-as-is to guide me
Click to expand...

I find that illogical..
Why? Because without a definition of reality-as-is, there is nothing to trust!
..perhaps what you mean is that you trust those who invented "Pure Land Buddhism"? :)
 
Last edited:
muhammad_isa said:
I would say that that was a meaningless question..
Trust in what? Trust in your own mind? Trust in somebody else's mind? Trust in "reality-as-is"? What exactly?
I assume you refer to grace, as in good manners, decency and respect. That is neither logical or illogical, is it?


I quote from another of your threads:-


I find that illogical..
Why? Because without a definition of reality-as-is, there is nothing to trust!
..perhaps what you mean is that you trust those who invented "Pure Land Buddhism"? :)
Click to expand...

My definition of Reality is that it is Reality! Open your eyes. Begin there. Most of us do.

The genesis of Pure Land Buddhism can be traced back as far as you want it to go. It is now a subject of much scholarship. Myself, I think of some words of Carl Sagan, that if you really want to make an apple pie from scratch, "you must first invent the universe."

Again, something I have posted elsewhere, of Dogen....

Therefore, if there are fish that would swim or birds that would fly only after investigating the entire ocean or sky, they would find neither path nor place.

Again, sorry, we seem to be on different planets. Like Ziggy Stardust once was.

The great Christian mystic Meister Eckhart:- "Love has no why"

PS. You obviously assume wrong, and I feel, do so deliberately.
 
Hopefully the Moderators will turn a blind eye to this (ref my posts on this thread that speak of Buddhist teachings, looking through I note that more often than not they originate because of direct questions concerning my own understanding, and that I have very often used direct Christian examples, even NT verses, to illuminate them)

But.....Ziggy Stardust. Not really me being flippant. The book I am reading, the biography of the two year life of Ziggy, the man from Mars, AKA David Jones, AKA David Bowie, who was born and who died at the Hammersmith Odeon.

A fascinating book, which traces the "stardust" that all went into the making of Ziggy. From the star gazing of the Babylonians and Greeks, Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo. Onto the imagination of Beethoven, of H G Wells and the War of the Worlds, "The Planets" by Gustav Holst, the stories of Quatermass created by Nigel Kneale. "On the Road" by Kerouac, "Tutti Frutti" by Little Richard, Elvis, Buddy Holly.........even a black eye from a punch received by David when he nicked the girlfriend of another by an act of outrageous deception. All went into Ziggy. Where did he begin, who invented him?

Begin where you like.

Being candid and honest, when I seek to begin with the sources of the NT, the history of Arabia in the 7th century and before.........etc etc, I find trust dying. I see the work of very very human hands. That is the way it is, how it has been, for me.

Leaving the Abrahamic Faiths for Buddhism, then leaving Theravada for the Pure Land, I have found Trust and Grace. For me it is real. I live it.

@muhammad_isa , your questions are totally meaningless to me. I regret that you do not understand.

All the best
 
So where did my Faith/Trust "begin"?

When the doctor smacked my bum just after birth (or maybe even before then)? That I was wanted? That my parents loved me? Sunday Schoo? Religious Instruction for GCE? Accepting Christ as "my own personal saviour" in my early twenties? When I turned my back on the Fundamentalist nonsense? My atheist, existentialist days as I ponced about in a meaningless universe reading "Waiting for Godot" and "Nausea"? Or the Liberal Progressive Christian days, reading through the NT many many times? Reading "The Vision of Dharma" by the Theravada Elder Nyanaponika Thera, hearing through his wonderful commentaies, for the very first time, the heartbeat of the Dharma? All the reading of the many Theravada Texts? When I became despondent at Theravada, as too world denying, too monastic based? When I headed for the Pure Land and began to say the Nembutsu? When I started meditating or when I stopped?

@muhammad_isa , I have no idea. When will you at least try to understand the way of no-calculation, when questions stop and Trust begins. And please try not to discredit Grace by "assuming" I mean "good manners", which I actually found offensive. But I will give you the benefit of the doubt, we all see with different eyes.
 
CobblersApprentice said:
And please try not to discredit Grace by "assuming" I mean "good manners", which I actually found offensive.
Click to expand...

Sorry .. I don't understand .. that is the dictionary meaning :)

I just found a term called "divine grace" in wikipedia.
wiki said:
Divine grace is a theological term present in many religions. It has been defined as the divine influence which operates in humans to regenerate and sanctify, to inspire virtuous impulses, and to impart strength to endure trial and resist temptation; and as an individual virtue or excellence of divine origin
Click to expand...

..but that brings us back to questions about the origin of what you follow.

It seems that you are content on following something "which seems good to you", without any particular authority.
I have been a Muslim for around 45 years now (I became a Muslim in my 20's), and the idea of following something "blindly" i.e. without divine authority, appears to me to be an unreliable path to tread.

Do I think that it is possible to be righteous without genuine, specific divine guidance? No, I don't.
Why? Well, just look at how the secular world has different opinions and laws, constantly changing over time. We are not smart enough to always get it right :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top